Competition lapdog a cert to approve newspaper monopoly

43 comments on “Competition lapdog a cert to approve newspaper monopoly ”

• Comments are now closed

1. Ad 1

   14 May 2016 at 8:29 am

   “Whatever people say about the digital age of information, it is hard to see websites filling the void left by newspapers.”

   Have the occasional moments of nobility really been worth it?

   For the once-a-couple-of-years breakthrough exposing something bad, newspapers are 70% advertising, 20% recycling of media releases, and 9% weather and sport. They are banal, demeaning, and almost always on the side of the oppressors.

   Young people are paying less and less attention to the news. That’s not necessarily their fault. Perhaps they are right. Perhaps they are choosing to distract their minds from the oppressions of the world, and instead engaging in a truth that they alone control and engage in.

   Undoubtedly, the reason the left decry the decline of newspapers is because it signals a new decline in the singular “town hall”, in which there really is a public sphere, in which politics and policy still matter.

   No one who has found themselves on the pen-end of a reporter or editor will weep. Righteous truth is usually their code for license to humiliate and debase at will. Reporters can remain “free” all they like.

   This proposed merger is mere lifeboat commerce, finally hitting these shores when it’s long since hit every other. Good riddance. If politics is to reassert itself as important to generations who have long switched off the news, it will need to figure out ways to do so without the NZHerald. Goodbye to them, and good riddance.
   • Bill 1.1

     14 May 2016 at 10:54 am

     Baby and bath water Ad. I’ve no problem with individual newspaper titles disappearing. But journalism? Granted, the media industry has been kind of garroting journalism for some years and serving up pap. An army of Nicky Hager types might be nice ,but you know…

     Public subsidies for newsprint might work. It worked in the past for the US where, before the age of advertising, there was a plethora of newspapers that weren’t bound by commercial imperatives. The result was a screed of openly bias and informative news sources.
     • Ad 1.1.1

       14 May 2016 at 12:50 pm

       Nicky Hagar is a rare person, who only needs us to buy his books to get his investigations out.
       He doesn’t need Mr Murdoch.
       • Ralf Crown 1.1.1.1

         14 May 2016 at 1:44 pm

         The problem is that people like Murdoch and Key are good at finding ways to silence him, they can make good use of fores as police and courts, threaten him, harass him and smear him. His family is also a target to warn others not to follow his example. Most investigating journalists have now bee silenced in New Zealand.
         • Ad 1.1.1.1.1

           14 May 2016 at 4:51 pm

           That’s a question of funding, principally, not a question of M&A.

           The series Newsroom and The Wire were good pointers on where old news gathering is going.
   • greywarshark 1.2

     14 May 2016 at 11:57 am

     Ad and she’ll be right, go with the flow, you can’t fight it so roll over and get your tummy tickled. Your theme BAU.
     • Ad 1.2.1

       14 May 2016 at 12:48 pm

       You sound like an old person.
       ‘Mock The Week’ does a better job of the truth than NZHerald’s Mr Armstrong ever did.
   • Ralf Crown 1.3

     14 May 2016 at 1:40 pm

     I think you are wrong, but the real problem with the fast forming media cartels is that they select, and in detail steer, the content towards what the owner want the public to know. The cartel, not only the media but also the other commercial operation they support, filter the news so people are indoctrinated in their opinion. The balance is the digital media as thestqandard.org. What we must see is that also the digital media form cartels as a counterweight to the cartel in the paper media. Another factor is how the defamation rules and other laws effect publishing. We can see this in the treatment of Nicky Hagar or Vince Siemer. The establishment is trying to use the full force of the justice system to silence any competition, not only buying it up. The solution is one – that all web media support each other, each web paper always carry links to all other web paper. The other solution is the emergence of web media located overseas and run by expat kiwis resident in other countries, which the New Zealand courts justice system can not raid and suppress. Another angle is using anonymising software as TOR and Tails to publish. The paper cartels will never find out who the people behind the publication are and can not shut down the operation or threaten the people behind it. Such an operation can also ignore all New Zealand court decisions to silence them. One example is the new web paper The Kiwi Herald on wordpress. It is apparently published in the US by US residents, and cannot be attacked by the New Zealand establishment and silenced. Unite, or die.
     • Ad 1.3.1

       14 May 2016 at 4:50 pm

       That idea of all web news outlets linking to each other has been going on for a while, except that engines do it for you. A really good example is the aggregator Reddit, where you can tool it very highly to your own interests. Plus go toe to toe with experts in the dialogue sections.
2. AmaKiwi 2

   14 May 2016 at 9:06 am

   Simon, thank you for an excellent post and summation of the industry.
3. Lanthanide 3

   14 May 2016 at 9:33 am

   ““My view is that the Commerce Commission will approve it,” veteran analyst, media commentator and Managing Director of Milford Asset Management told The Standard.”

   Still incorrectly stating that interviewees are talking to a computer server.
   http://thestandard.org.nz/the-link-between-tax-havens-criminals-and-the-amoral-rich/#comment-1171156
   • Bill 3.1

     14 May 2016 at 10:17 am

     Do you have a workable alternative that isn’t clunky or silly sounding? The first time I saw it I thought ‘hang on’…for the same reasons as you But then, he’s using reporting conventions that other authors don’t have to use because we ain’t doing reporting…at least not interview based reporting. Me or I (in the place of ‘ts’) possibly just doesn’t work.
     • Et Tu Brute 3.1.1

       14 May 2016 at 10:56 am

       The writer is writing an article which will appear exclusively on The Standard therefore it seems conventional to say “When asked by The Standard…”. A volunteer could write for a community newsletter and say “When asked by this newsletter…”. It could also be read as a short form of “When asked [on behalf of ] The Standard.” It doesn’t reflect ownership. Naturally ‘The Standard’, ‘The NZ Herald’, ‘Radio NZ’ etc… are not persons which can ask, have opinions or say anything.
     • Ralf Crown 3.1.2

       14 May 2016 at 1:50 pm

       A workable alternative is that webmedia form a counterweight cartel and always link to each other, to support expat kiwi publishing which can not be silenced, and to use anonymous publishing with TOR and Tails. Esse non videri, to act without being seen. The “enemy” you cannot see – you cannot attack and kill. Long live the webmedia cartel.
   • Simon Louisson 3.2

     14 May 2016 at 12:44 pm

     Build a bridge and get over it
     • Lanthanide 3.2.1

       14 May 2016 at 3:52 pm

       I just think there should be one rule for everyone.

       It seems very hypocritical that moderators would punish commenter’s for referring to something published by ‘The Standard’ as if it were a human, and yet author(s) get to use that same phrase as they see fit.
       • fender 3.2.1.1

         14 May 2016 at 9:48 pm

         Unless you still have a bee in your bonnet over an historical ban I can’t see why you keep banging on about this.

         It’s like you’re trying to tell an author what to write 😉
         • Lanthanide 3.2.1.1.1

           14 May 2016 at 10:03 pm

           1. I’ve never been banned from the Standard
           2. In the comment I linked to, Lynn pretty much said it was up to commenters to point out the rules for use of the term “The Standard”, hence I’m doing my job
           3. I’m not telling the author what to write (ie, what subject to write about). I’m pointing out that their usage of the term “The Standard” goes against established protocol on this site. The author is completely free to ignore my comment – as in fact they so far have been doing.
           • fender 3.2.1.1.1.1

             14 May 2016 at 10:15 pm

             “….doing my job” 😎

             Good work soldier 😆
4. roy 4

   14 May 2016 at 10:06 am

   Stuff behind a paywall. What rubbish. It’s hard enough to go there as it is.
5. tc 5

   14 May 2016 at 10:17 am

   ‘TV in this country has fed off newspapers’ because it’s lacked any journalist resourcing at the required levels to generate its own for a long time in this country now.

   Public broadcasting is a necessity unless we want to end up being rolled into the oz outposts of global messaging empires.

   Thanks Simon, excellent as always.
6. Bill 6

   14 May 2016 at 10:46 am

   There’s a presentation on-line given by a US scientist on global warming. At some point he pulled out the figures for denialists in the US and pointed out that the surge in their numbers dovetailed with the denialist, idiot Murdoch, gobbling up US media outlets.

   Now sure, sometimes things just happen.

   On a separate point. Although I rarely scan an actual newspaper these days, I’m well aware that on-line perusing is much more blinkered. In a very real sense, nothing ‘catches the eye’. ‘Most Read’, ‘Most Popular’ sidebars don’t really play that role. And further links to articles associated with the one being read serve a different purpose again.

   Not unconnected with that point is an ‘old school meets new school’ idea I had the other week – to have a jotter handy when on-line due to often having multiple tabs open, possibly read something, then a couple of days later realise it’s lost forever.

   Unlike the case of newspapers, magazines or books, I lack the ‘landmarks’ necessary to find my way back to a place I’ve only been to the once. (‘History’ links require remembering what the link refers to and so, for me, are fairly hopeless).

   Now I’m going to be told that people have been doing that for years (paper prompts for electronic navigation) and what the hell have I been thinking for all of this time? 😉
   • One Anonymous Bloke 6.1

     14 May 2016 at 2:30 pm

     Hold the ctrl key down and press ‘d’ to bookmark something, although I’m not quite sure that’s what you meant.

     Then figure out how to organise your bookmarks 🙂
     • Bill 6.1.1

       14 May 2016 at 3:00 pm

       🙂 I knows how to bookmark. But then I look at a list of links that mean nothing because there isn’t really any indication of what sits behind the bookmarked url. And the bookmark might be to the homepage of the site rather than the actual page. And what site was it again? And was it under category A or category B. Or did I drop it into… And I’ve no memory prompts along the way.

       Compared with.

       Know how when you flick through a magazine or do any kind of paper based search, and you can find something by association? Like, you know that what you’re looking for is somewhere just before that picture you’ve flicked past…or you remember making that doodle just before moving the thing you really want to find to…? Found it! And also, unlike web sites, you know pretty quickly…within a few secs…. whether you’re in the right magazine or not…or in the right pile of papers…and god help any ‘helpful’ soul who might tidy or catalogue what’s already a perfectly functioning system.

       The web and computers are like an imposed alzheimer type thing to me.
       • One Anonymous Bloke 6.1.1.1

         14 May 2016 at 5:35 pm

         You can edit the title for each bookmark.

         So if you wanted you could use some sort of catalogue/numbering system to organise them by subject, or whatever. This also applies to ctrl+s – the ‘save as’ option.

         Hence the ‘politics’ folder on my hard drive 🙂
         • weka 6.1.1.1.1

           14 May 2016 at 6:08 pm

           I’m using Firefox and its bookmarking system is pretty antiquated (I should look for a specific application I suppose). I do use the ‘ctrl +bookmark all tabs’ option from the contextual menu quite a lot, which prompts loading them in a folder that I have to name. I can then search manually or by keyword and keywords are for both the file name and the URL (and description I assume but I don’t use that). It works, and Bill it does use similar kinds of brain stuff in terms of cues to remember what I am looking for, but I do sometimes have to open a lot of links to find what I want. You’d think by now someone would have designed a better system (yes, that’s a prompt for someone to point me to the right app).
7. Draco T Bastard 7

   14 May 2016 at 11:49 am

   Whatever people say about the digital age of information, it is hard to see websites filling the void left by newspapers.

   It is really only fully employed journalists who have the wherewithal, resources and inclination to delve into the deeply buried ills and wrong-doings of society.

   I’ve considered that it would be like thus:

   The government would set up the servers that the journalists publish upon, provide all the financial and legal support that the journalists need to operate but not have any say in what the journalists report on.

   Although there would be editors to catch spelling mistake/grammar and make suggestions on sentence structure they too would not have a say in what the journalists, either working independently or in a group, report on.

   This should give us an entirely independent news.

   The problem comes in the form of the government cutting funding but a UBI might even be able to deal with that.
   • Ralf Crown 7.1

     14 May 2016 at 1:57 pm

     The real problem is that the government does not want that to happen. They want a media they can control, there is an invisible alliance between the paper cartel and polarities. The government would love to be able to shut down every independent media in the world, just look how they skillfully eliminated almost every independent investigating journalist already. Funding is not needed, or wanted, because funding means control. Who pays the piper…… Digital webmedia is the solution, all web media need to join hands and link to each other.
8. Once was Tim 8

   14 May 2016 at 12:04 pm

   I live in hope that when we eventually get a decent gubbamint again, it’ll have an interest in restoring our democracy and sovereign rights by whatever means necessary, and free us all from corporate hegemony. Be that through anti-trust measures (a la AT&T), giving the Commerce Commission some strict guidlines, decent constitutional legislation, restoration of a public sphere and 4th Estate (not just news and current affairs, but arts and culture too), proper funding of the Ombudsman’s Office, etc., etc
   Despite the waffle, this government isn’t actually that interested in small business either (unless they’re mates) – a bit like Turnbull’s latest policies/budget. Some are slowly beginning to wake up to that ……. slowly
   Strangely enough, so far the only person I can see that places any sort of priority on it all is Winnie.
9. Richardrawshark 9

   14 May 2016 at 12:36 pm

   Fk em,, sooner Newspapers die the better, it’s like watching a cancer patient die.

   As for paywall they won’t survive that.

   It’s the digital age they either adapt or die, There is a good gap for an independent well managed site in NZ giving news and current events articles, the better the web site the more visits the more advertising. Either News papers sharpen up to their web presence or die off and smart web programs and digital information changes.

   As for the reporters in this country from our daily media sources, the sooner their influence goes the better.
   • Ad 9.1

     14 May 2016 at 12:54 pm

     Or at least, once paywalls are common here, that there is an elite class of information-rich individuals with the means and patience to get through the paywalls every day, and everyone else can just figure out who gets the rose this week.

     i.e. like now, but a bit moreso.
   • joe90 9.2

     14 May 2016 at 1:19 pm

     Fk em,, sooner Newspapers die the better, it’s like watching a cancer patient die.

     The Bachelor, footy scores and press releases, I can hardly fucking wait.
     //

     According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, here is how the total American job numbers looked 15 years ago, and today:

     2000: 65,900 news reporters, and 128,600 public relations people

     2015: 45,800 news reporters, and 218,000 public relations people

     So 15 years ago, there were two PR people for every reporter in the country. Now there are 4.8 PR people for every reporter.

     https://muckrack.com/daily/2016/04/14/america-now-has-nearly-5-pr-people-for-every-reporter-double-the-rate-from-a-decade-ago/
     • Macro 9.2.1

       14 May 2016 at 1:59 pm

       This from The erstwhile Frank Macskasy makes an interesting comparison.

       Budget data showing increases to the Prime Minister’s Department makes for sobering reading.

       Michael Cullen’s last budget, 2008/09, allocated $25,470,000 to Vote Prime Minister and Cabinet.
       In the same 2008/2009 Budget, Radio NZ was allocated $31,718,000 through NZ on Air, an increase of $2,644,000 (approx 8%) from the previous year.
       In National’s first Budget, 2009/10, Vote Prime Minister and Cabinet was allocated $33,021,000 – an increase of $7,551,000 – or just under 25%!
       In the same 2009/2010 Budget, Radio NZ’s allocation went up by $98,000 to $31,816,000 – not even a 1% increase.

       For the first time, the Prime Minister’s Departmental budget exceeded that of Radio NZ. Furthermore;

       Since 2009/10, Radio NZ’s allocation has stayed the same; $31,816,000.
       By contrast, the amounts allocated to the Prime Minister’s Department has increased, and in the 2015/16 Budget was allocated $49,298,000 – an increase of $24,476,000 since 2008 and a near-doubling of John Key’s department and Cabinet expenditure since Michael Cullen’s last budget, seven years ago.
       In the 2015/16 Budget, Radio NZ was allocated $31,816,000 – a nil increase.

       Framed another way, a news media organisation – dedicated to informing the public about government activities – has had no increase in resourcing since John Key’s administration came to power in late 2008.

       By contrast, the Prime Minister’s Department – dedicated to promoting the power of the Government and more specifically, pursuing National’s political agenda – has had a doubling of taxpayer funding.

       My Bold.
       And we wonder why that man-child remains as PM?
     • Robertina 9.2.2

       14 May 2016 at 3:16 pm

       NZ public relations versus print journo numbers:

       https://figure.nz/chart/a1QVwmkdtuOdPyTo

       https://figure.nz/chart/3SsArOPL7rncDToA
   • Robertina 9.3

     14 May 2016 at 3:33 pm

     Wow, that’s a sophisticated take you’ve got there Richard: ‘let em die!
     As analysis it’s right up there with what you said in January about a female journalist:

     ”Hope next time said sports personality meets her she finds out how her big mouth has consequences. Yeah I mean she gets a right old smack to the head.”

     BTW there’s no sharper or more adaptable web presence than the Guardian and it is bleeding along with all the other media outlets.
     • Richardrawshark 9.3.1

       14 May 2016 at 6:26 pm

       Didn’t know I was analysing anything, more like making a tongue in cheek remark with a tinge of how a feel about the state of things.
       Excuse me if I bleed or get emotional about blatant disrespect like certain said female journalist attacking someone using the paper to make her personal feeling known. Said person ridiculed like that. I got emotional, i’m no MP, i’m just a person, with feelings sometimes triggered with outrage at crap like Frans.

       If you think that makes me someone to stalk like you just did, go for your life. My take is if you don’t want criticism Robertina don’t slag people of in the National newspaper using a pretence of elder journalist with respect to get away with it.

       and what I said was wrong, I din’t need you to hunt my herald alias down, find one of my posts and tie it to my standard non de plume…shady.
       • Robertina 9.3.1.1

         14 May 2016 at 6:40 pm

         You’ve lost me . . . what’s your herald alias and how am I tying it to your non de plume? You made the comment here on The Standard.

         Having thought about it, it’s not your fault that those kind of comments are tolerated at The Standard, and I am sorry I raised it as it really is pointless.
         I notice those kind of comments, and have also been cursed with a good memory.

         While newspapers are not and never will be perfect, the public life they help foster lifts us a little bit higher than the kind of careless and frequently misogynist internet commentary that this glorious freewheeling digital revolution has engendered, so I suppose that was the somewhat tenuous justification for highlighting your previous comment, but as I say I regret doing so.
10. Robertina 10

    14 May 2016 at 1:12 pm

    A few points:

    – It might be worthwhile for someone who writes for The Standard to interview Paul Tolich, E Tu’s national media organiser, whose PR yesterday said:
    ”……plummeting revenues for news media of news aggregators such as Google and Facebook.
    “They are getting free content. This can’t continue because no-one gets free content. You can’t have a situation where people are free-loading.”

    Some intellectual engagement with what is, as Tolich points out, an idea whose time has come (taking on big boys of FB and Google) would be nice. Otherwise we’re only hearing the view of a widget-minded investment analyst.

    – Journalism still has high union membership. Maybe it’s wishful thinking but if a merger goes ahead I don’t think the journo job losses will be that high (there are lots of other jobs affected too though). E Tu has a tough job ahead.

    – If there’s one thing the Fairfax experiment shows, it’s that mastheads (individual titles like Southland Times, Sunday Star Times) do still matter.
    NZME. is the dominant player in the potential merger and retains the kinds of news execs who played no part in the Fairfax experiment. It will be interesting to see if they try to rebuild the mastheads, and the role of a paywall in that.

    – People forget reader numbers are growing bigger than ever, even while revenues plummet, and these businesses are still profitable (Fairfax – $70m profit last year).

    -Implying the Guardian is some kind of panacea (if only they could set up in NZ etc) is wrong. Has Gaynor checked out the recent publicity about the Guardian’s financial woes?

    – Gaynor says this creates opportunities for digital journalism but there are ample editorial opportunities in digital now, but few can make digital journalism pay because (as Gaynor has pointed out) aggregators have attracted the advertising revenue.

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1605/S00176/meetings-for-e-t-media-members-over-planned-media-merger.htm
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/05/13/guardian-exiles-former-editor-rusbridger-over-financial-problems/
11. Stuart Munro 11

    14 May 2016 at 2:44 pm

    This is the inevitable result of the anti-competitive practices of monlithic news providers: they have destroyed their market. TV news is doing the same – neither 3 nor One are worth a moment of my time.

    Monopolistic corporations do not innovate, they are not entrepreneurial, and they hate quality and public service passionately.

    It is a transition period for media – great threat but also great opportunity. Friend of mine did her PhD on quality in journalism – the paper she worked with grew its circulation by 70%. Murdoch isn’t beating a path to her door though. She’s gone off the grid – self-sufficient organic gardening.

    Corporations do not like expertise – it interferes with the power games and career paths of the psychopaths. They’d rather lose their shirts.
12. Rae 12

    14 May 2016 at 5:15 pm

    While we don’t need a slew of journalists to cover the “man bites dog” stories, we definitely need investigative journalism, the sort of stuff that got Teina Pora out of prison, and we need political analysis and commentary. The first is probably the least important of them.
    • Richardrawshark 12.1

      14 May 2016 at 7:57 pm

      That’s right Rae, we need the forth estate to be honest, they seem to have lost their place in the media world and turned into all things for all people.

      It’s such a important part of democracy that the monopoly that is being created is rather more IMHO important an issue than many take it as.

      I cannot help their business model but if it’s not working they need to change or fade with time like other failed businesses.

      Their certainly is a void in the current market for an outlet that calls it as it should be. Criticizes when they should and approves just the same.
      _ Robertina, did io say that here? oh, 🙂 I said it on the Herald as well, Fran upset me that day, I remember reading a tirade from her in the Herald. Must have pressed my button IDNK.

      was bad form by me tho, to tell the truth we had a struggle for a long time getting my bi-polar meds right I only just found one that worked, i’m a little more laid back and less depressed now.
13. linda 13

    14 May 2016 at 7:44 pm

    i don’t even think TV broadcasting let alone news papers have a future lets face it we get all news we want via Google all programing we want bbc rt you name it tvnz is next after the papers you just don’t need all that broadcasting infrastructure
    they will go the same way as dvd rental shops gone.
    at its core media is a distribution business. they were the gate keepers of information that monopoly and controlled access to the viewer has well and truly been blown away
14. Jan Rivers 14

    15 May 2016 at 10:12 pm

    So, a perfect time to mention that Scoop has just kicked off the 2016 fundraising / membership drive

    Locally owned independent news has never been more important and Scoop’s publishing model and in-house journalism ensures that local organisations and a broad range of views areavailable. In addition Scoop has that and positively no stories about the B******r.

    I’ve recently taken on a trustee role with the Scoop Foundation for Public Interest Journalism and am happy to answer any questions about the Foundation or this fundraising / membership building round. There is a summary of some recent news in the links to the PledgeMe site above.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS